35 views 3 mins 0 Comment

Madras HC dismisses petition against amendments made to AIADMK constitution

- September 20, 2021

Chennai, Sept 19 (BPNS)

Madras High Court on Monday dismissed a writ petition filed against the Election commission accepting the amendments made to the constitution of AIADMK.

The first bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Chief Justice, Sanjib Banerjee and Justice P.D.Audikesavalu dismissed the petition filed by Advocate B . Ramkumar Adityan of Thoothukudi.

The petitioner had claimed that he had joined the AIADMK in the presence of its then General secretary Late J. Jayalalithaa in Kovilpatti on December 6, 2000. He said that he renewed it in 2014 and it expired in 2019 and could not be renewed as the party did not took any steps for its renewal.

He said that after the death of Jayalalithaa the party general council appointed V.K.Sasikala, the close aide of Jayalalithaa as the interim general secretary. He said that the Election Commission of India could not approve her appointment as also the resolutions passed in the general council meeting of December 29, 2016.

The petitioner said that after the Supreme Court convicted V.K.Sasikala in a disproportionate asset case and was jailed. Her nephew TTV Dhinakaran was appointed as the Deputy General Secretary but due to factional feuds in the party, the Election Commission of India (ECI) froze the two leaves symbol of AIADMK in March 2017.

He said that in the AIADMK general council meeting held on September 12, 2017, 12 resolutions were passed. The petitioner said that one of the resolutions was to substitute the post of the powerful General secretary by Coordinator and Joint Coordinator of the party.

Ramkumar B. Adityan said that O. Panneerselvam and Edappadi. K. Palaniswami assumed office as coordinator and joint coordinator respectively and said that this major change in the AIADMK constitution has to be canceled.

The first bench of the Madras High Court refused to buy his argument and said that the ECI’s acceptance of the amendments to the party rules, did not appear to be out of order. The court held that such acceptance was just a ministerial act performed on the basis of communication received from representatives of authorized political parties.

The court also held the view that the ECI was not expected to interfere in the internecine issues of every party and find out whether the rules and regulations of that party were followed scrupulously.

The Madras High court also said that if the petitioner has still any grievance he could approach the civil court seeking appropriate remedy against the AIADMK.